okx_get_index_tickers

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description includes '[L:READ]' indicating read-only behavior, which adds transparency beyond the absent annotations. However, no other behavioral traits (e.g., data freshness, pagination, or side effects) are disclosed, so it is minimally adequate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short and front-loaded with important tags, but the inclusion of Chinese text ('行情' and prerequisite) is cryptic for non-Chinese readers. It is concise but at the expense of clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the output format, when to use this tool over alternatives, or any other contextual details necessary for proper selection and invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already has descriptions for both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description does not clearly state what the tool does; it only provides a category label '[行情]' and a prerequisite. The tool name implies it retrieves index tickers, but the description fails to explicitly confirm this, leaving purpose ambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus its many siblings such as okx_get_ticker or okx_get_index_price. The only instruction is to call agent_catalog first, which is a prerequisite, not a usage guideline.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.